IMC versus ATPL Nav exam.

[jessie01]

Can anyone tell me how difficult it is to attain an IMC rating in terms of both the flight test and the exam that you have to pass?

Having studied the Atpl Nav subject and nearly passed ie 68% would i be in a strong position to pass the IMC paper?

Finally , if i take the rating in a ICAO registered country would it be recognised and valid in the UK.

many thanks

jess

[somewhatconcerned]

If you can say hand on heart that you have the following abilities you'll pass an IMC rating.

1. You are a compitent PPL.. .2. You have a vague idea on how to accomplish a hold and instrument approach.. .3. You are able to blag those abilities every 24 months.. .4. You are able to realise that the privalages offered to you as an IMC rated pilot should never be used in anger as they could end in damage to the aircraft and others.. .5. You realise that the previously mentioned privalages are just a common misconseption and with English weather you are better off staying on the ground rather than taking off with 3 oct+ cloud cover blo 3000' if you have no real IMC experience other than your IMC rating.

If you are willing to put in a week of evenings for study, you'll be fine!

[A and C]

Somewhat......you seem to have a very low opinion of the IMC rating and the people who have passed the test.

There are people flying on an IMC rating who are as good if not better than people with the full IR however it is all about practice and most IMC rating holders dont do enough IF practice to keep up the skill level that they had on the day they passed the test.

The obsticals put in the way of the PPL holder in terms of ground exams dicourage all but the most persistant for going for the IR because of the content (i ask you why do PPL holders have to do a fuel flight plan based on an airliner ?)then having jumped that hoop the flight test is so structured that it is much more predictable that the FAA flight test that requiles the pilot to "think on there feet" rather than perform a pre-planed route.

The thing that realy leaves me speechless is that a lot of british pilots think that the FAA IR is a second class IR and not quite the real thing.

[RVR800]

A and C

Agreed...

There a lot of British Pilots flying American. .built aircraft who are dismissive of American. .Pilots in general. Their (US) accident record is . .very good so I dont quite know what its based. .on. It's arrogance.

Many pilots approaching into LHR today have a 'mere' FAA IR.

There is something wrong with the JAA system that. .means that only single figure numbers of PPL . .IR's are issued yearly in the UK. Its a scandal.

The IR should be seen as a rating to build. .skills upon not as a be all and end all...

This is why the Americans have many PPLs flying . .quite safely on their FAA IRs building experience. .prior to becoming acceptable to the airlines.

Over in the UK its expensive difficult time consuming and at the end of it they say 200 hrs. .oh come back when you have built more experience. .So not surprisingly there lot of ultra-pi55ed. .of people around.

And dont quote the UK Wx special weather clause . .at me - Ive flown out of Teterboro New Jersey US in winter - freezing levels on the surface etc... .Poor vis etc

The JAA should have just subcontacted out to the. .FAA - aviation would boom and there would be more jobs

This whole licensing thing is way too political. .,and it is more about job creation than safety....

[Megaton]

And if the IR were easier/cheaper to achieve GA aircraft in the UK would be able to fly more often unhindered by the weather, hourly rates would go down as the aircraft flew more hours each year, more instructing jobs and everybody wins. Sadly, none of this is going to happen.

[Polar_stereographic]

HP,

But, would that not be more risky for the Belgrano than saying 'no'?

PS

[somewhatconcerned]

The nail has been hit squarely on the head. An IMC rating requires minimal experience and long periods between renewals and full blown IR's are way too expensive. . .I also have a US IR and feel it should be an equivilent of a UK IR it was an invaluable experience for me.

[Megaton]

PS,

You're spot on. Much easier to say no than to do some constructive thinking and encourage aviation. It's beyond belief that a country with weather like ours should actively discourage the IR. Why don't they just ban GA once and for all; it would be much tidier thanhaving all those peky aircraft cluttering the skies over Blighty.

[schuler_tuned]

We seem to have got a bit political, and whilst i agree with all of the above and throwing addeded gripes about restrictive airspace and the inability to fly deserted low-level airways vfr, the posting was about the imc rating, was it not?. .1, the imc is not a nav paper, it contains elements of all the subjects pertinent to the rating, such as general nav, radio nav, instruments, air law.. .2,the imc confuser is a great revision aid, but ther's no substitute for knowing and understanding your subject.. .3,try to fly as much of your training in real imc, not just with fogles, it's very different! And, by the way, i'd personally like to see the regulations changed to match the i/r regarding the reference to outside references ie, non, which fogles don't do.. .4,it's not an i/r, so think very carefully before you fly, as a basic rule- are you current,is the cloud base above your miniumum on-route safety altitude, and is the freezing level above msa? . .5, it's a great rating to enable you to fly vfr on top, and not to restrict x-country when the layer is below 3,000ft, and the tops and the airspace aren't too restrictive, subject to the above.. .6,it's good fun, it improves your flying, your options (with expierence) , so go and do it!

[twinkletoes]

I have always been supprised with the amount of people with IMC rating who think that it is basicaly an IR but with increased approach minimums. I'm fortunate as I have an IR and never really had to get to grips with the restrictions of IMC but was constantly confused with conflicts between information I read and what I was told. From the information I read, an IMC rating is still fairly restrictive it's more a 'get out of jail card'.. .I'm glad to hear schuler_tuned mentioned restrictive airspace, I went through a stage of trying to plan vfr trips trying to avoid entering as much airspace as possible or avoiding it completely using varying altitudes and routings. That doesn't mean I didn't want to talk to the agencies as I am a firm believer that 'it's good to talk' when flying. I just wanted to avoid the 'remain clear' response from atc.. .Anyway I came to the conclusion that this was virtualy impossible. I also started to believe that airspace was not only designed to be safe and practical but also to deter the less experienced pilots from bothering atc'ers.. .Anyone agree???